>Literally impossible to refute
basado
>>25344849Tartovsky's art is fundamentally tied to cinema, it could not exist in another form. Almost all movies—most of the "classics" included—are mediocre and trite thoughever.
Then why are Jodorowsky's movies pretentious snorefests while the comics he writes are fun as hell?
>>25344866>movie bad>other artform goodUhhh not sure how this is at odds with the OP
>>25344862>Tartovsky's art is fundamentally tied to cinemaCinema just keeps losing.
>>25344849He's right. Film is a visual medium. Book adaptations always lose 50 iq points and easily 99% of cinema just exists to tickle base interests with minimal mental engagement. We look at TV shows as formulaic and invent genres like "procedural" or "soap" but then act like movies in aggregate are any different. Every romance movie is the same thing, every action movie is the same thing, and whatever outlier you're going to want to respond with is an outlier precisely because the standards are so scripted.
>>25344862Herzog’s quote here is a good stick to beat Tarkovsky with, I think. If a film is like a dream, then AT is a prime example of someone weighing it down with thought - or attempting to be poetic. The poetic is not poetry. Poetry is a product of the unconscious mind. The poetic is conscious. And so many poetic things contain not the slightest poetry.
>BUT MUH MEDIA LITERACY>BUT MUH VISUAL VOCABULARY
>thing you like bad because I don't like it>thing I like good because I like itWow, what a stunning and well reasoned argument. True scholar of our times and totally not a bitter retard crying out for attention.
>>25344892I disagree entirely. Ontologically, even.
>>25344911I guess that would be your most convenient option. The bit about the poetic and poetry standing back to back is from Cocteau.
>>25344866only holy mountain is like that, el topo is a fun romp as is santa sangre
>>25344922Yeah it doesn't fit my experience of... anything involved really, from poetry to psychology. There's not a discrete or even firm boundary between conscious and unconscious. I wouldn't describe movies or even Tarkovsky as dreamlike either, although I see why people do. Thanks though.
>>25344888You could litterally say the same thing about mass market books.Paperback romance books are exactly as formulaic, same with thrillers and other such genera fiction. 95% of books brought to market are highly derivative garbage. However the 5% are true art and elevate the medium.Same could be said about TV. Meanwhile movies have a slightly better ratio of art to garbage with 10% of movies being true art and 90% being garbage. Also while film adaptations of books are usually bad, the same can be said of most book adaptations of films. Things tend to be better in the medium they are created for originally. This isn't because film or books are inherently worse art forms but because they were crafted by the creator in the original medium as the truest expression of the creator's intent.
>>25344909One of the most acclaimed directors in history was probably not crying out for attention when he was speaking with the NYT at the peak of his career.
>>25344866>Whining about muh phallus for the billionth time and being too retarded to understand there are *unavoidable* physical reasons aerospace engineering converges on phallic forms This unironically just killed my interest in Jodorowsky. Midwit.
>>25344942You'd have a point if it wasn't Werner Herzog lol
>>25344849considering he was a director himself i'd wager he wasn't demoting with some>/tv/ stupid /lit/ smartsilliness but rather suggesting that it's a much more raw and immediate artform, which it isit doesn't require any parsing, the flow of images is just there, it's the closest artform we have to dreaming really, and scholarly scrutiny might ruin the thing.in any case it's quite funny how a quote involving illiteracy was poorly understood down here of all places
>>25344932Well I’m not describing a firm boundary or wall, I’m talking about a direction. Welles called film a ribbon of dreams. >Thanks thoughany time.
>>25344945your loss
>>25344900they must have dogshit taste in music to think like this>>25344909you sound mad and insecure
>>25344977this shit must go hard for 17 year old virgins
>>25345016He sounds dismissive and annoyed.
>>25344949>it's quite funny how a quote involving illiteracy was poorly understood down here of all placesyeah you dont say lmao
>>25345016
>>25345041hah he knew what he was doing throwing bartok in there
>>25344862>Almost all movies—most of the "classics" included—are mediocre and trite thoughever.Can say the same for literature though.
>>25344888Blade Runner is a better text than Do Androids Dream, however. And Apocalypse Now is superior to Heart of Darkness. A more modern example: You were Never Really Here, which is an awful book and a very good movie. The first 1995 Ghost in the Shell film is a much deeper, more meaningful work than the shallow, teenaged manga it was based on. You are right for the vast majority of adaptations but sometimes certain directors are able to elevate an idea beyond its source.
>>25344888Film is a lot higher tier than TV though. TV is very dumbed downed and focused on relationships, of fake people that don't exist, for the audience to learn factoids of. It's very low IQ media. Film is more about archetypes.
>>25344940I'd say it is more like 0.0001%. There really is a lot of slop out there.
>>25344945is it possible it is satire of generic sci-fi fiction filled with generic pulp heroes despite being "high concept"? nah
>>25345069Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell(95) are so bad that they convinced me there's a contingent of people who will suck off literally anything cyberpunk that goes mainstream.
>>25345301this
>>25344940>cant use the word literally correctly>how do you do fellow bookworms
>>25346015Dude spelt the word wrong but used literally correctly and in the correct context. [literally /lĭt′ər-ə-lē/adverb In a literal manner; word for word. "translated the Greek passage literally." In a literal or strict sense. "Don't take my remarks literally." Really; actually. ]A typo isn't the same thing as using a word wrong.
>>25346030no he didnt also nice spacing
>>25346030I didn't even notice he spelled the word wrong when I posted that lmao, he still used it it in a superfluous manner which is something everyone with a high school diploma is taught not to do.>let me appeal to the dictionaryWhat does any of that have to do with pic related >>25346015
>>25344849Horseshit. Filmmakers like Leos Carax are the equivalent of Michelangelo and Gaudi in craft and contribution to the human experience. The Blakean spirit of fine film is one of the greatest things humanity has accomplished and the closest we have come to manifesting the experience of the ideal in the material world.https://youtu.be/OPJ6TMdI9aA?is=68jaBLJLe6gjh8Yghttps://youtu.be/VUIO79SNnDI?is=AkYq00LhYXbPvIW5
>>25346065>he still used it it in a superfluous mannerNo he didn't. You were just triggered by a word and wanted to post a meme image you had on the ready but refuse to look at the context of the word being used according to it's definition. Now you are doubling down even though you spouted off reflexively like a trained dog.
>>25346081>BUT MUH DEFINITION THOUGH
>>25346087You have no argument because you are a NPC with defective programing.
>>25346098>You have no argumentI do, it's right here: >>25346087>you are a NPC with defective programingThis is known as an ad hominem fallacy. It is LITERALLY not an argument.
>>25346103A out of context quote from someone else about their taste in word choice isn't you making a argument. It's you regurgitating programing like a unthinking robot. You have moved from >the word was used wrongGot proven wrong so now switched to>well the word is bad and shouldn't be used because someone else said soAll because you can't admit that you just butted in because you wanted to post a unrelated meme image because your programing was triggered by a word you have been trained to react reflexively to.
>25346105you didnt read the image and you didnt address any of its points, so, concession accepted. i win!
>>25346105>A out of context quoteIt's literally in context. >about their taste in word choice isn't you making a argumentIt's literally an argument.>unrelated meme imageIt's literally related. >your programing was triggered by a word you have been trained to react reflexively toThis is literally an unrelated non-argument.
>>25346106You are literally a retard.
>still can't read or directly address the imagei still win!
>>25346105okay but did he figuratively move the posts or did he literally do it, you're not being clear or specific enough
>>25346118>has to claim they "win" Looks like you are the one who "protest too much" and has to overly declare things to make up for the lack of substance. Not the one who is using normal words in a conventional way according to their common definition.
>still can't do it
>>25346133Literally did several times, including in the post above. Again, you are literally retarded.
>>25346137>Literallysee >>25346015
>>25346141see>>25346116
>>25346142
>>25346143It is a accurate observation based on your behavor.
>>25346145
>>25346145my god you want to sound cool and smart so bad lmao
>>25346148That isn't even pertinent to the conversation. You are posting random shit now. Again, because you are retarded. >>25346150Ah, you are showing a image to represent how you look whenever you attempt to read anything above a 1st grade reading level. I do hear that visual aids help special needs people express themselves. Good for you. Have a cookie.
>>25346145okay but is it literally accurate or metaphorically accurate
>>25346158It's literally pertinent.
>>25346159Literally accurate, as in has markers of clinical mental retardation. Not metaphorical as in a person occasionally lapsing into silly behavor.
>>25344849Many of the great filmmakers were writers and well read. All of the French New Wave. Dreyer. The Golden Age of Hollywood was carried by highly literate screenwriters. There, just refuted it.
>>25346162lmao you are so fucking dense and easy to bait. "literally" a retard kek
>>25346160It literally is not. Also try to put all your feeble thoughts into one post rather than double posting every time you have a brainfart. I know it's really hard but just think for a few seconds before you hit post so you know if you have anything to add.
>>25344893>visual vocabulary i cant tell if you're using alliteration to be funny or if this is an actual redditor phrase
>>25346167Notice no one feels the need to add quotes when they say you are literally retarded. It's because they actually mean it. They legitimately think you are mentally deficient. No irony. No pretense. No sarcasm. They literally think you are literally a retard.
>The guy bad at diction is also bad at basic fundamentals in reasoning
>>25346176okay but do they literally actually mean it or do they colloquially, expressively actually mean it
>>25346178Telling on yourself again?
>>25346166he was talking about the medium itself, wasn’t he, not the practitioners. film communicates through images, movement, rhythm.
>>25346158>Have a cookie.do you want me to have a literal cookie or a symbolic cookie
>>25346181If you can't figure it out then I have bad news for you.
>>25346189okay but do you want me to literally figure it out or figuratively figure it out
>>25346187The offer of a cookie has been retracted. No cookies for you.
>>25346191>okay but do you want meNo one wants you.
>>25346202>quote miningprobably comes natural to coal miners kek
>>25346145>>25346158>>25346183you want to be smart so bad kek
>>25346208I can see why from your prospective you would think that. After all you are on the same level of intellect as farm fowl. So a human without intellectual disabilities similar to your own must seem like a total smarty pants.
>>25344849then dafuq dead he mean by this?!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA-UBVKQFM0
>>25346178the best part is when they spend all that time typing paragraphs explaining why you're mad whilst sounding mad lmao
>>25346247Needing to agree with yourself by replying to yourself is just sad.
>too pussy to samefag properly
>>25346333
>still pussy
>>25346118Stop with this awkward posting, fuck.
>>25346451>YIKES
>>25346467Ok.
>>25346485Yes.
